MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4293859060 · doi:10.1037/cp2007014

Introduction to functional data analysis.

2007· article· en· W4293859060 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Psychology/Psychologie canadienne · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicNeural Networks and Applications
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsFunctional data analysisFunctional principal component analysisComputer scienceSet (abstract data type)Data setAsk priceData scienceSeries (stratigraphy)Data miningMachine learningArtificial intelligenceBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Psychologists and behavioural scientists are increasingly collecting data that are drawn from continuous underlying processes.We describe a set of quantitative methods, Functional Data Analysis (FDA), which can answer a number of questions that traditional statistical approaches cannot.These methods are applicable for analyzing many datasets that are common in experimental psychology, including time series data, repeated measures, and data distributed over time or space as in neuroimaging experiments.The primary advantage of FDA is that it allows the researcher to ask questions about when in a time series differences may exist between two or more sets of observations.We discuss functional correlations, principal components, the derivatives of functional curves, and analysis of variances models.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.886
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.005
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0030.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.068
GPT teacher head0.325
Teacher spread0.257 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it